Apology: "Homeopathy is not witchcraft, it is nonsense on stilts"

[EbonyBranch]

Homeopathy is not witchcraft, it is nonsense on stilts.

I'm sorry Tony, but you just don't know what you are talking about, There have been NUMEROUS studies of the efficacy of homeopathic remedies.

 

The assertion that homeopathy is 'nonsense on stilts' is quite plainly an insult to stilts, which do serve a useful purpose in many ways (unlike homeopathy, which is face-meltingly stupid...)

[redrobbo]

Let us not overlook the influence that the heir to throne attempts to wield on the subject of homeopathy ....

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1252745/Prince-Charles-backed-homeopathy-secret-talks-ministers.html

 

But then it's hardly surprising that Prince Charles has vested interests in promoting homeopathy when his Duchy Originals brand makes a "detox tincture" - which was described as "outright quackery"....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/apr/26/prince-charles-aide-homeopathy-charity-arrested

[milquetoast1]

I'm sorry Tony, but you just don't know what you are talking about, There have been NUMEROUS studies of the efficacy of homeopathic remedies.

 

The assertion that homeopathy is 'nonsense on stilts' is quite plainly an insult to stilts, which do serve a useful purpose in many ways (unlike homeopathy, which is face-meltingly stupid...)

You had me going for a couple of secs there. I was just thinking, "crikey Ebony that's not like y..." when the penny dropped.

[milquetoast1]

With a government putting the likes of David Tredinnick and Nadine Dorries on the health select committee homeopathy may be the least of our problems.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/jun/26/conservatives-health-select-committee

That is really scary, and goes someway to confirming my concerns about the Tories when it come to matters on science.

[onewheeldave]

Some people want homeopathic remedies and it's their taxes etc which fund the NHS in the first place.

 

Many of those people want to have the choice to use homeopathic remedies despite knowing full well that there is no scientific evidence for it working.

 

Given the very small amount of funding devoted to homeopathy (relative to the overall cash used for conventional treatments), IMO, it should be left alone.

 

Tom Dolphin-

"Homeopathy is not witchcraft, it is nonsense on stilts. It is pernicious nonsense that feeds into a rising wave of irrationality which threatens to overwhelm the hard-won gains of the enlightenment and the scientific method," he said.

 

Why these rationalists seem to increasingly feel the need to attack, bully and deny people the right to choose the treatments they want (even if, in the eyes of the 'rationalists' those choices are deemed 'irrational') is beyond me, but, I wish they'd cut it out.

 

 

 

I've pondered this post for the best part of an hour now. I really can't decide if you are serious, or trolling.

 

Surely, you can't believe that the taxpayer should fork out for such a discredited, unproven type of "medicine".

 

I'd have thought that proof that it works would be a pre-requisite for approving any kind of treatment.

 

I'm saying people have a right to choose a therapy on their own terms, even if that other group of people who consider themselves to be 'rationalists', decide that the therapy in question is 'irrational'.

 

It's about choice- people have a right to choose according to their own ideas/beliefs, most especially in this case where they are actually themselves providing a significant portion of the funds.

[Tony]

I don't think that anyone would disagree that they have a free choice, just they don't have a right to the NHS paying for it if it does not work. Homoeopathy is freely available to anyone that wants to pay for it.

[alchresearch]

I'd be interested to know how much the NHS actually does spend on homeopathy a year actually..

 

According to that Guardian article:

 

The Society of Homeopaths claims that around 600 doctors prescribe homeopathic remedies and points out that the NHS spends just 0.001% of its £11bn drugs budget on them.

 

Or £110,000.

[Tony]

I did that mental arithmetic too but instantly realised that the trouble with the calc' is that it doesn't take into account the cost of doctors, nurses, infrastructure and the NHS funded Royal London Homoeopathy Hospital.

 

That lot probably adds up to a bit more than £110k. The shocking truth is that the NHS is spending tens of millions a year on quack 'medicine'

[TimmyR]

Homeopathy is one of those curious things that doesn't actually work but it does. theres no hard scientific evidence for it but theres plenty of hearsay and anecdotal evidence that it does.

 

Should it be provided on the NHS? Probably not

 

It does not work any more effectively than a placebo. That has been proven through clinical trial.

 

The placebo effect works. Homeopathy does nothing more than that. There's no way it should be available on the NHS.

 

I do however believe though that doctors should be able to give out placebos. I even read the placebo effect works when people know they are being given a placebo.

[discodown]

It does not owrk any more effectively than a placebo. That has been proven through clinical trial countless times.

 

THe placebo effect works. Homeopathy does nothing more than that.

So it works then? If the placebo effect works and homeopathy is nothing more than that then it works?